That seemed to the Chair to make some sense that you have to move both of them along together. I see here, if I read your testimony correctly, that you feel that there should be more emphasis on the basic research rather than upon applied research.

Mr. STOUT. Yes, sir. When you get to applied research programs, they become quite costly and you start running the dollar sign up rather rapidly. But much basic research as Dr. Waterman mentioned previously can be done in a laboratory with a small amount of money. When you start distributing $1 million over a number of regional projects there isn't very much for any one group. So that it is better, I think, to confine it to the basic in the early stages.

Senator BIBLE. I am glad to get your viewpoint on that.

Secondly, you suggest that it be established on a regional basis rather than on numerous small uneconomical projects in several States.

How would you specifically do that, on a regional basis?

Mr. STOUT. That seems to make some sense. I mean the far Western States have one general problem, the southwestern region another problem, our region in Illinois possibly another, possibly the Pacific Northwest has a different set of facts governing it.

Senator BIBLE. Do you think the Advisory Committee on Weather Control as set up in this proposed bill is the correct committee to authorize and to direct this program?

Mr. STOUT. I haven't been too close to the Advisory Committee work, only in an indirect way. I don't think I can comment on that, sir.

Senator BIBLE. But you do feel that the bill should be broadened out in its objectives, you think it is kept too narrow in just the field of cloud modification?

Mr. STOUT. That is right.

Senator BIBLE. Since National Science Foundation is set up for basic research it appears they would be the local group to undertake this work.

Senator BIBLE. Senator Schoeppel?

Senator SCHOEPPEL. No questions.

Senator BIBLE. Senator Case?

Senator CASE. I think Mr. Stout has made several valuable suggestions. I might make this observation with respect to this being on a State basis or regional basis.

The suggestion in the bill merely states public agency. It wasn't expected that the program would be applied in any State where there wasn't some interest in it. This is not a suggestion of a program like a public roads program where you allocate so much to each State.

It would be expected that the land-grant colleges, if they were to ask for cooperative programs, would be only those colleges which are in areas where they have a water problem. Unless there were something in the State law that limited them to working just within the State, their activities might be more than statewide.

In other words, I think that the bill contemplated studying the problem from the natural region that is associated with cloud formation.

The little booklet to which Mr. Stout referred is a very illuminating one. It has just recently been published by the Department of Meteorology at the University of Chicago. Dr. Horace R. Byers, the chair

man of the department has written me a letter with respect to the earlier hearing which I will make available to the committee a little later. This booklet is as recent as this, that it bears the imprint of February 4, 1957. It starts off with a rather striking sentence, "more than 6 times as much water flows across continental United States in the air as is carried by all the country's great rivers."

It concludes with this interesting paragraph:

The inflight cloud-seeding tests of the University of Chicago cloud physics research group proved conclusively that it is possible to initiate the rain process in certain cumulus clouds through the introduction of large quantities of water spray. The rain at the ground can also be increased by an amount that is thought to be small. Tests involving the introduction of dry ice into subcooled cumulus clouds were inconclusive, but further work is anticipated. The next step is to test the use of silver iodide, especially as put into the atmosphere from an airplane.

The booklet takes up the structure of ice and snow crystals and the structure of raindrops, compares the size of raindrop particles with the particles from silver iodide mist, and it is a very interesting booklet. It is copyrighted, I don't know whether that would interfere with it being put in the record.

But certainly the members of the committee ought to have as many copies as they can use.

Senator BIBLE. This is adopted by references in the record.

We will ask the staff to see if it is possible to secure other copies of this pamphlet for use of the subcommittee.

Any further questions?

Thank you very much, Mr. Stout, we appreciate your testimony.
Our next witness is Mr. Langfitt.

Do you have a prepared statement?

Mr. LANGFITT. Yes, sir.

Senator BIBLE. Proceed.

STATEMENT OF MERRILL J. LANGFITT, FARM SERVICE DIRECTOR, RADIO STATION KMA, SHENANDOAH, IOWA

Mr. LANGFITT. Mr. Chairman, my name is Merrill Langfitt. I live in Shenandoah, Iowa, and am farm service director for radio station KMA. I am not representing any commercial organizations here except my employer. In our business of radio broadcasting, we are interested, among other things, in giving service to farmers.

One of those services revolves around weather information. Last year when we were extremely dry, and had been for 3 years, farmers of our area asked assistance in setting up a weather-modification pro

gram.

It is not my purpose here to evaluate that program, but rather to convey to you the reaction of our farmers to such a venture. One of the most valuable aspects, it seems to us, is to have an accurate, longrange weather forecasting service from the people who are at present engaged in carrying out our weather modification efforts.

As you well know, the attitude of farmers in a large way guides their behavior. In March of this year, Dr. Irving Krick appeared before 700 farmers in the KMA auditorium and told them that his long-range forecast called for above normal precipitation for April, slightly below normal for May, above normal again for June, and slightly below normal for July and August. At the same time he told them

they could expect, as a result of cloud seeding, to have normal or slightly above precipitation for the entire growing season. Dr. Krick's forecast put new life into our area. Seedsmen started selling seeds, fertilizer sales boomed, bank credit loosened up, retail sales took a spurt, and business in general was very good.

Dr. Krick's forecast has held true to this date and regardless of the cloud-seeding efforts, an accurate long-range weather forecast is worth the cost of our entire modification program. I might add that 6 weeks after Dr. Krick made his forecast, the Weather Bureau came through with essentially the same forecast.

It is not my purpose to criticize the Weather Bureau, because we use their service, too. We should recognize, however, that the Weather Bureau is conservative and I'm afraid they are not always most effectively employing new methods and new equipment in forecasting.

I might add that Dr. Krick sends to KMA by telephone a daily weather forecast direct from their weather laboratories in Denver, pinpointed to our specific area. These forecasts have been very accurate and of great monetary value to our farmers. This service is provided to our farmers at no cost, in fact, Krick pays the telephone costs and gives our farmers the benefit of their vast weather information as a part of their service in the Iowa-Missouri weather modification area. Of course, by means of radio, the forecast service reaches farmers in the entire four-State area served by KMA, including part of Senator Schoeppel's State of Kansas.

I have given you this information as a prelude to building a case for private weather forecasters with reference to the service they can perform in weather research. These private forecasters such as Dr. Krick and his organization, employ personnel in the field who are close to the people and to the weather as it exists and as it develops from day to day.

This is purely conjecture on my part, but I feel that our most important weather research in the future must come, in part at least, from the commercial weather organizaitons. They will not be limited by slow conservative bureau policies, but can progress as fast as their funds will permit. By the very nature of their operation, they will need to be alert and aggressive.

Their income is directly dependent on their skill; therefore, they must continually move forward in weather research. Our farmers have developed a tremendous degree of confidence in Dr. Krick's organization, based on their past performance. I believe that Federal funds in the hands of those who are now conducting field operations in weather modification, would in a short time, give us new and valuable information about the complex phenomenon of weather.

I believe that even today some of the private forecasters have more statistical weather data than the Weather Bureau and that such data is being well applied in ways that are serving well to give farmers accurate weather information.

It would be the hope of myself and the farmers that I represent that we will see the time when Government funds may be forthcoming to match funds raised by farmers to increase the scope of our weather knowledge and then apply that information in ways that will better serve the needs of all of our communities.

No doubt the Weather Bureau can do more than they are now doing if they had more funds, but we feel that additional funds in the

hands of those already doing weather modification would greatly advance that science of weather modification and accurate forecasting. We think it is very desirable, from a purely economic standpoint, if nothing else, that more weather research be done. Federal funds must be allocated for at least a part of the job. Farmers, businessmen, and commercial meteorologists can very well make an important contribution to any weather research that may be done, thereby supplementing the work done by the United States Weather Bureau.

I have observed to some extent the work of the advisory committee and have been impressed with the detail of their evaluations of projects. They would be a logical group to supervise weather research work in the field and with them lies the greatest opportunity for further research. Certainly the advisory committee should continue their present activities for several more years and preferably with more funds to work with.

I have attached a sheet which is self-explanatory except I would like to comment on it. We started our weather modification program in June of last year.

Senator BIBLE. What type of a program was your weather modification program?

Mr. LANGFITT. This was a cloud-seeding program for the purpose of inducing precipitation.

Senator BIBLE. Thank you.

(The document above referred to is as follows:)

Rainfall, January 1951-January 1957

You will note the close resemblance on the graph of the line representing average precipitation for 6 years, the line during the wet years and the line during 1956. The main difference being in the amount of rainfall, but not in the peaks and lows. Take notice also of the peak last year in July at a time when lows occurred in the other two lines. We are wondering if cloud seeding caused this deviation in pattern. Cloud seeding started about the middle of June, so we are, at least for the sake of argument, suggesting that we might have had a low last year in July, following the general pattern, had it not been for cloud seeding. Another thing worth considering is that if we had had a low in July last year, we would have had a virtual corn-crop failure. My assumption is that the high peak we hit in July is the only thing that gave us a corn crop last year.